[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDI-137?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.sy... ] Antoine Sabot-Durand updated CDI-137: ------------------------------------- Description: Currently ProcessSessionBean class signature is {code:java} public class ProcessSessionBean<T> extends ProcessManagedBean<Object>{} {code} Therefore, observers work as Example: {code:java} @Stateless public class Elephant{} public void observe(@Observes ProcessBean<Elephant>) // --> Not allowed public void observe(@Observes ProcessSessionBean<Elephant>) // --> Allowed {code} Pete said that main reason of using ProcessManagedBean<Object> is that {quote} {{ProcessBean<X>}} offers a method {{getBean()}} which returns {{Bean<X>}}. {{Bean<X>}} has a method {{create()}} which returns an {{X}}. If we were to have {{ProcessSessionBean<X> extends ProcessManagedBean<X>}} then this would imply that you can create something of type, which in the case of a session bean is the bean class (which can't be created for EJBs with local or remote business interfaces). So ProcessSessionBean is correct as is. {quote} Main reason of using the {{ProcessSessionBean}} event is to observe "Session Bean Class" registration, not the observe for the session bean local interface/s. Moreover, other methods in the interface hierarchy of {{ProcessSessionBean}} gets {{<X>}} into the account, for example {{AnnotatedType<X> getAnnotatedBeanClass()}} returns the AnnotatedType representing the bean class. Therefore, it is more convenient to change "ProcessManagedBean getBean" method declaration as {{public <T> Bean<T> getBean();}} where {{T}} is the local/local view interface of the session bean. And change the {{ProcessSessionBean}} signature as {code:java} public class ProcessSessionBean<X> extends ProcessManagedBean<X>{} {code} Also See https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDITCK-215 was: Currently ProcessSessionBean class signature is public class ProcessSessionBean<T> extends ProcessManagedBean<Object>{} Therefore, observers work as Example: {code:java} @Stateless public class Elephant{} public void observe(ProcessBean<Elephant>) // --> Not allowed public void observe(ProcessSessionBean<Elephant>) // --> Allowed {code} Pete said that main reason of using ProcessManagedBean<Object> is that {quote} {{ProcessBean<X>}} offers a method {{getBean()}} which returns {{Bean<X>}}. {{Bean<X>}} has a method {{create()}} which returns an {{X}}. If we were to have {{ProcessSessionBean<X> extends ProcessManagedBean<X>}} then this would imply that you can create something of type, which in the case of a session bean is the bean class (which can't be created for EJBs with local or remote business interfaces). So ProcessSessionBean is correct as is. {quote} Main reason of using the {{ProcessSessionBean}} event is to observe "Session Bean Class" registration, not the observe for the session bean local interface/s. Moreover, other methods in the interface hierarchy of {{ProcessSessionBean}} gets {{<X>}} into the account, for example {{AnnotatedType<X> getAnnotatedBeanClass()}} returns the AnnotatedType representing the bean class. Therefore, it is more convenient to change "ProcessManagedBean getBean" method declaration as {{public <T> Bean<T> getBean();}} where {{T}} is the local/local view interface of the session bean. And change the {{ProcessSessionBean}} signature as {code:java} public class ProcessSessionBean<X> extends ProcessManagedBean<X>{} {code} Also See https://issues.jboss.org/browse/CDITCK-215 -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.11#6341)